What do you gain, I wonder, from your reductions, sans context? For that’s what those discarded connections are/were — some of them, at least — and you have discarded them. What is left, that is useful, when context is discarded? 
Even though you expect to regain those connections later, an idea that does confuse me, and maybe intrigue me a little too…
A sense of continuity, the other end of life.
I allow my brain to lead, I become merely an advisor of thought. Brain is a powerful ‘black box’, best not to disturb it.
I may have got this very wrong, but this reads to me as though, when you refer to your brain, I would’ve referred to my mind, in the same circumstances?
Mind is an extended body, as far as the notions I’ve put forth in this discussion.
No, is the answer. Refer to brain.
(What you’re doing with mind, is selecting sense; it’s spaciousness, and thinking mind is this active play of conscious experience.
There’s more proper understanding of that, it’s the brain, body and senses.
Mind is an extended body. What is ‘use of brain’? It’s synonymous with the body and the extension of such).
Ah, so it seems that you intend “brain”, as an “extended” thing, in the same way as I say/use “bodymind”. 
Thanks for the clarification. 
Mind is an extended self.
A body-part is in brain space. When combined with body-matter, it becomes mind(an extension).
(What is brain activity? Brain, mirroring the body including itself- which results in mind(the passive recognition of local environment)).
Mind is a full-self extension in brain-space. The format of this body-enviromental extension, is like trees and gunge.
Mind is not exclusively qualia in sense data, nor is it consciousness.
It’s what the brain and body does together, and not what the brain and body is.
You may note a brain-space, local chaos, of subliminal indecisiveness.
Consciousness is seated in brain and body, it is akin to mind.
The common view of our consciousness, a body down below, seemingly jacked on as an extension, is strange beauty regarding this topic.
You can use mind by selecting the difference between self and the environment.
The fulfillment of an eye, is brain.
If consciousness is an extension of brain-space and body-matter, brain, as experienced by consciousness, is an extension, and thus, brain is truthfully a field.
There’s something extra given this knowledge; a stilled-energy, in the locale of the conscious-brain-extension.
I’m currently exploring this ‘stilled-energy’. I will report my findings here.
(As I have it, a correction for my prior posts, is that mind is body matter + brain space, in act. It can be tricky to put mind online, I am hoping this ‘stilled-energy’ is the key).
(As a fun task, try your best to: body-matter + brain-space, in effort to put mind online).
If we note that the conscious experience of body-matter is not at the actual body-matter locale; we can transform our thought of it, where it seemingly is a centering off the conscious-vision of the body, including the brain, which is a body-part. However, this is an incorrect association, it can’t be said that body-matter locale is of upright body-matter; meaning that true body-matter locale is an abstraction.
This is technically the opposite, in the case of the brain locale, which is transformed in thought to be ‘propulsing’ and ‘expanding’, as a field.
There is a body-matter and brain-space(the prior kind), in consciousness.
Colour and texture; grade and beauty, are a ‘dormant’-brain-space and ‘dormant’-body-matter extension occurring in objects in the environment, what can be described as dormant-consciousness.
You can sense grade/beauty(dormant-body-matter) and colour/texture(dormant-brain-space) in dormant-conscious objects.
Does the brain-space of consciousness differ from the dormant-brain-space of dormant-consciousness in objects? Yes, brain-space is fully constructed, and dormant-brain-space is partially constructed.
Dissecting conscious experience, to account for body-matter and brain-space(prior), may be a step back from consciousness, which is a vantage over both, and is instead with body-matter-incarnate and brain-space-incarnate, and then together, consciousness-incarnate.
The sky has no texture and no grade, but has colour and beauty, and creates clouds which have texture, grade, beauty and colour. Our brain-space has texture but no colour, and our body matter has grade but no beauty, and is opposite to the sky.
Clouds are formed when invisible water vapor in the air cools and condenses into visible water droplets or ice crystals.
Consciousness has colour, beauty, texture and grade, all separate.
The produced-opposite to consciousness, like a sky is to cloud, is a pen-shape, or a well-shape. I theorize that creating a mind requires these. More expansive, a spear-shape, or a watchtower-shape.
The Adam’s Apple is a pen shape that can be degraded to a spear shape.
I have managed to create a ‘neat-spasm’ by relating sky and the most complex view of self I’ve got. This is one way to complete the body-matter mixed with brain-space, challenge.
I would like to introduce the term ‘sate’, sate-hood being the normal/easiest way to create mind(body-matter (x)+ brain-space(where x is exactly how they’re combined)), what we are sated-in.
I think our sate-hood(if we are the same sate-hood), is to do with hair.
Hair is the closest limb-collection to the brain, it is also a mark of sovereignty. Hair being a multiplex of tails/pens.
I managed to create a mind via selecting ‘home’, and corresponding with an ‘out’. This is a hair-psyche(the link from one end to the other).
If you want to create a mind, the simplest way is to comprehend your sate-hood.
Signals from our senses, taken together, are what form our internal representations. The brain merely compares them with one another and, as a result of this multifactorial analysis, produces an internal picture for our consciousness. The signals from our senses are the foundation. But they shouldn’t be considered in isolation, but rather as a whole.
Have you read The Ego Tunnel, by Metzinger? I couldn’t wade completely through it, but I think he is arguing that the ego is some sort of avatar created to be the experiencer? Or something?
[This message meant for @Angel, but I screwed up the quote thing somehow.]